2015 (6) TMI 1022
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....mas Mathew Nellimoottil, SC JUDGMENT ANTONY DOMINIC, J. Heard the counsel for the appellant and the learned Standing Counsel appearing for the respondent. 2. In this appeal, stay order dated 23.3.2015 passed by the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal, South Zone Bench, Bangalore in S.T.26506/13 is challenged. The appellant society was issued a demand for service tax of about ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....which the Tribunal has again directed the appellant to deposit Rs. 1 crore and report the compliance on 4.6.2015. It is in this background impugning the order dated 23.3.2015, this appeal is filed. 4. From the judgment of this Court in C.E.8/13, what we find is that the order dated 19.8.2013 was interfered with, primarily for the reason that there was no finding on the issue of limitation raised ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....the normal period. This, therefore, mean that the issue of limitation, though not considered by the Tribunal, cannot have any relevance in so far as this 35 crores is concerned. 6. The appeal is of 2013 and this is second round of litigation before this Court and if we direct reconsideration, that will only delay the final disposal of the appeal again. 7. In such circumstances, instead of remitt....




TaxTMI
TaxTMI